When it comes to expressing ideas and opinions I’ve often been fascinated at the diversity of ways people choose to share.
While I was attending church regularly in the small community I live in, I was elected to the parish advisory board. The board was made up of members of the congregation who were responsible for the day to day operations of the parish and to work with the priest when it came to the ministry of the church.
Board meetings were often made more interesting by the diversity of those sitting at the table. I’m not talking about cultures, I’m talking about communication styles. There was one elderly couple I found to be a contrast in extremes when it came to communicating matters they felt strongly about.
My first introduction to Mabel was at an advisory board meeting following a talent show in the church sanctuary. As a group we discussed how the show had gone over with the audience and possible ways to incorporate that success into encouraging new people to try attending worship at our little parish. There was some talk of possibly making it a semi-annual event.
I had never made the connection between the value of a seemingly unrelated community event being used to improve worship attendance. Yes, I was young and had a lot to learn in life.
Mabel had sat quiet through most of the meeting. As we moved toward the end of the meeting she spoke up. “Well, there is something I need to say here. You need to know, people are NOT happy at the use of the church sanctuary for anything but worship. It needs to stop now!”
I saw a bemused look flicker across the priest’s face as the rest of the group sat in silence waiting for her to respond. “Well, I'm guessing they might object to The Woman in Red for the next production then, eh?”
Mabel shook her head and made a derisive sound but didn’t answer. The meeting ended without further discussion.
I watched at meetings as Mabel often invoked “people don’t like” as though she was speaking truth for the masses. I often was left wondering who these people were. It was a small congregation and I didn’t hear other members agreeing at meetings or even when chatting with them.
Mabel wasn’t a bad person. She had given many years of faithful service to the parish. Most of the time what she was expressing were opinions on actions we were either taking or considering. It was rather puzzling why she was always the messenger for these silent people.
The priest must have been just as puzzled. She’d been with the congregation for only a few months. Finally at one of our meetings she challenged Mabel. In a non-confrontational manner she asked her who these people were. Mabel declined to say.
She took a different approach, she asked for a general idea about them. What age group are they in? How many people? What genders? Did they have any suggestions what to do instead of what they were objecting to?
Each question saw Mabel grow increasingly non-responsive. The penny finally dropped for me. The people in Mabel’s statements were really a person, her. She was speaking her own ideas and not owning them. She thought expressing herself as speaking for others carried more weight. They would get more attention.
Instead of owning her ideas she tried to project them onto others who may or may not be in agreement. She believed she spoke for the silent and carried their message. She was also of a generation in which women were not encouraged to have or express ideas no matter how good they were.
Her husband, George, had no hesitation.
George would put his opinions out as fact you dare not refute. Ask a question or express a counter idea and you’d soon find yourself on the end of a man screaming at you to mind your place.
By then I was serving as parish secretary. I was seated beside the priest during meetings, taking notes and generally helping our then new priest to keep on track.
One evening we were discussing a project we wanted to undertake to repair part of the building. George forcefully laid out who was going to do the work and how it was going to be done. People around the table looked around uncomfortably. They didn’t agree with him but were nervous of saying so.
The priest asked if more than one contractor had given a quote on the job. One of the parishioners spoke up to say no, but he thought there should be. George responded as he always did, he started repeating himself at the top of his lungs. An even more uncomfortable silence fell around the table.
I was not prepared for the explosion which erupted beside me. The priest responded by just as loudly screaming back at George that other contractors would be consulted and he was to stop yelling at people. My pen gouged the paper as I jumped out of my skin.
As I collected myself I glanced around the table. George had fallen silent, glared at the priest and then nodded assent. Mabel had a look of shock on her face and others looked relieved. The days of George clubbing others with his words were over.
In the following years Mabel would point to that incident as her proof the priest was the worst we ever had. When she was reminded the priest had yelled in response to her husband yelling, she would shrug and say, “well that’s just George but he was THE PRIEST!” like a priest should never raise their voice.
There is nothing wrong with having ideas, concerns or suggestions about anything. We have every right to not only have them, but to express them. We need to own our statements. They are no better by claiming they are group-think than by claiming them as your own.
Yelling and demanding what you’re putting forth be accepted as gospel is wrong and manipulative. Putting yourself forward as the spokesperson for others is just as manipulative. It’s one thing to have been talking to people, summarize what you took from the convo and then give your opinion. It’s quite another to claim you speak for them.
Want to keep up on what is happening in The Ramble? Sign up here
Until Next Time — Just Steem on
If you like this, please follow me and upvote the post.
Totally true.
I rejoice when people immediately start using the Royal We, staying their opinion as irrefutable fact, and slide into condescending tones when challenged. They have saved me the pain of getting to know them and disqualify themselves from my acquaintance.
I admire leaders who don’t get to chose their team/congregation. It takes a special person to craft a win/win with people like that.
So well told!
Posted using Partiko iOS
Hi, @shadowspub!
You just got a 0.2% upvote from SteemPlus!
To get higher upvotes, earn more SteemPlus Points (SPP). On your Steemit wallet, check your SPP balance and click on "How to earn SPP?" to find out all the ways to earn.
If you're not using SteemPlus yet, please check our last posts in here to see the many ways in which SteemPlus can improve your Steem experience on Steemit and Busy.
I hear this and agree at some levels. People can use words like clubs, sometimes without even having the intention of doing so. Its annoying to deal with, because they have learned actions and patterns at a subconscious level that might be selfish or belligerent, and dont mesh with how you think they should be.
However I also am of the very strong opinion that some people, such as women or minorities, dont bother to speak up when in the presence of a more forceful or blinkered individual or group because they are afraid of confrontation, dont wish to rock the boat, or wish to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. Look at the situation in politics where so many dont bother to vote. They simply feel that no matter what they say, think or feel, that in the end the people with money or power will win. So they don't even try. Perhaps it's a cultural thing where it's not socially acceptable to object or speak out.
People become silent when dealing with someone they know who intimidates them, or in a situation in which they feel unsafe. Perhaps they have had the experience of others twisting their words or making them feel that their opinions simply don't matter. Perhaps they believe that when it's only a few people who object, that their opinion becomes somehow inconsequential to the larger group opinion, or their objections will be buried by someone more forceful.
So while you poo-poo the method of a person hiding behind "they", you might also be understanding that "they" come from another generation, culture or circumstance, "they" might be protecting someone or a group of someones who fear speaking out, or "they" might not feel safe voicing their opinion amongst a group of strangers, given past experiences that you cant even begin to understand.
Forcing people into a position of having to defend their opinion when confronted with a group of united peers or leaders, who then might politely belittle or purposefully misconstrue their words to make that person look "manipulative", or to help themselves save face, is not a kindness. It might place them in a more vulnerable position when dealing with a bully.
Yet it seems the trendy thing to do, to label all of the people like this as "clubs" or "manipulative", rather than trying to understand their fears, or seeing them as people who might only be doing the thing they were taught to do, that they feel safe doing.
Reading into what people say and taking it with a grain of salt, listening to the facts of the argument, instead of the method of delivery, may be more advantageous and kinder in the long run.
I really appreciate this post as it helps me to evaluate how I present my views on topics. Folks like George really irritate me, but then again am I a George?
This indeed is something for my mind to chew on. Upon self introspect, I think I might be one that uses words like a club, too many times speaking as a pundit on many subjects when I do not have all the facts.
Growth... meditating on the content of this post, I believe, will help me to grow, or maybe just become a more tactful communicator.
Have a great week!
Congratulations @shadowspub! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPHi @shadowspub!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 6.109 which ranks you at #293 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has not changed in the last three days.
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 257 contributions, your post is ranked at #20.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
These are reactions to some unforeseen situation or context that are uncomfortable. The primary reactions are loaded with emotions and scarce of reflection.
Some people are more emotional and reactive than others, the way in which it manifests itself reflects diverse facets of the personality. We know that personality is quite complex, a lot has to do with heredity, genes, environment (experiences, education, cultures) etc.